Research Question: How does a well-rounded curriculum with enriching electives impact students? Author: Tory Kern
Introduction
In each of the five reputable sources, the importance of a well-rounded curriculum with enriching electives will be discussed. Diane Ravitch's chapter on the essentials of a good education will be examined first. Ravitch will focus on the purpose of education and what children need to become enlightened citizens. Second, Sam Dillon of the New York Times will provide examples of what narrow curricula look like and discuss why math and reading have been the priority of so many schools across the United States. Next, Linda Nathan, from Kappa Delta Pi's academic journal, The Educational Forum, will provide a heartfelt argument for integrating arts into academic curricula. Following this, the ways that arts training improve social and academic skills will be explored. Last, the negative impact of cutting elective programs will be considered in the hopes of showing leaders and American citizens that students need a well-rounded curriculum in order to thrive.
I. Chapter 24: The Essentials of a Good Education in Reign of Error: The Hoax of the Privatization Movement and the Danger to America's Public Schools
Citation: Ravitch, D. (2013). Reign of Error: The Hoax of the Privatization Movement and the Danger to America’s Public Schools. Vintage.
Summary: Acclaimed education historian and policy analyst Diane Ravitch has many ideas about how to improve public education. Ravitch's third solution states, "Every school should have a full, balanced and rich curriculum, including the arts, science, history, literature, civics, geography, foreign languages, mathematics, and physical education" (Ravitch, 2013). Having a full range of electives and academic opportunities is a reality for schools in affluent communities, but children who grow up in low-income areas do not have a similar experience with curriculum. No Child Left Behind and Race to the Top have linked federal funding and teacher evaluation to high test scores in math and reading, thus undermining the value of enriching academic areas other than those that are tested. Ravitch asserts that the sole purpose of education is "to prepare everyone to assume the rights and responsibilities of citizenship in a democracy," and that narrow curricula are not going to provide enough inspiration and information to students who are learning where their place in society will be. Rather than putting all of a school's resources and energy into a few subjects, Ravitch suggests that studying civics, government, economics, statistics, foreign language, creative writing, and the arts to help prepare students for life ahead. It is a diverse curriculum and ample opportunities for personal growth that will provide the time and place for the "mental, physical, and ethical development" (Ravitch, 2013) that students need. Ravitch is disgusted by the way that children are beginning to be valued solely for their test scores instead of the worth of their character, and she suggests schools shift their curricular priorities to be more expansive and accessible to all students.
Reaction: Reading Ravitch's claims helped me solidify my beliefs about the need for a well-rounded curriculum in American public schools. I was so fortunate to be offered pottery, film, French, economics, world religions, history, environmental sciences, creative writing, and advanced calculus all in one school. The problem is, I paid for that service and I agree with Ravitch that all children have a right to what I paid for. I believe that the inequities that are rooted in deeply rooted racism and classism manifest themselves in and are exacerbated by the differences in curricular opportunities amongst schools. I wish Ravitch explained more about how offering a wider range of courses to low-performing students it would affect their academic performance and personal growth. I feel conflicted because I do want all students to do well in math and reading, but I also know that only studying a few subjects that I am not good at every day would demolish my love of learning. Overall, Ravitch's points about the essentials of a good education made me more excited to research well-rounded curricula and gave me more confidence in my ideas about the topic. If more legislators knew about all of the positive affects of electives and enriching curricula, they might realized that pressuring schools to perform well in a few subjects leads to a well-rounded curriculum being compromised.
II. Schools Cut Back Subjects to Push Reading and Math
Summary: In this New York Times newspaper article, Sam Dillon writes about the current trend towards "increasing — in some cases tripling — the class time that low-proficiency students spend on reading and math" in America (Dillon, 2006). Dillon notes that this just a trend in some schools; rather, "71 percent of the nation's 15,000 school districts had reduced the hours of instructional time spent on history, music and other subjects to open up more time for reading and math" (Dillon, 2006). While some argue that students need to know the basics in math and reading before they can move onto anything else, others demand that American leaders take a stand and rework the educational system so that all students are able to participate in full curricular experience. Dillon discusses the affect narrow curricula have on the labor market by citing the heightened demand for mathematics educators and the lack of work for teachers who teach electives classes. Although remedial classes that take away time for electives have helped some students improve in math and reading, test scores have not been increasing "fast enough to allow [schools] to keep up with the rising test benchmarks" (Dillon, 2006). So, students who need the most help discovering the value of education continue to sit through hours upon hours of math and reading instruction that often bore them and tire them out. Overall, there has been a large shift towards prioritizing teaching time to math and reading instruction, and the neglectful treatment of other subjects has drastically changed the educational culture of American schools.
Reaction: This New York Times newspaper article made me feel enraged. To hear that policy makers and administrators have put teachers in the position where teachers have to tell their underprivileged students that they can only enjoy school again if they perform better on standardized tests is appalling. Instead of addressing root causes of inequity like poverty, discrimination, and inequitable funding, policy-makers actually have the audacity to strip the worst-off students of their passions and put them in remedial classes for all periods of the day but one. Students are absolutely going to continue to lose their desire to learn if creative electives and diverse curricula continue to be compromised by profit-driven politicians and businesspeople. Students in schools with narrow curricula are not even getting the chance to know if they like other subjects than math, reading, and gym because their options have been limited so much. Who will know what he/she is passionate about if he/she does not get a chance to look around and find out what intrigues him/her? Students who desperately want to take the courses they love are being told to concentrate in math and reading so much that they eventually can participate in what they love again, but such a suggestion is deeply flawed. Island schools need to think about what is best for the whole child, not just for test results (on tests that are culturally biased) because students need creative and diverse courses that engage and inspire them or they will just barely scrape by for the rest of their lives.
III. Why Arts?
Citation: Nathan, L. (2014). Why Arts? The Educational Forum, 78(4), 351–354.
Summary: In the article "Why Arts?," Linda Nathan eloquently describes how placing arts at the center of education can improve student's lives. Nathan writes that having creativity as part of the curriculum can give a school a sense of purpose and can help students feel like they play an important role in the world around them. Improving in history, English, or reading is so much more enjoyable for students when they are actively engaged. Performing plays, learning dances, and singing songs can teach students how to use their passion to stay determined and triumph despite hardships. Furthermore, acknowledging and celebrating students' diverse backgrounds in the classroom can be extremely empowering and add meaning to academic subjects that may have seemed mundane before they became personally relevant. Young people go through so much in their lives, and having a way to express their frustration, joy, confusion, or sadness is incredibly therapeutic and empowering. One lesson from art that transfers to academia is that you are going to encounter many problems and that questioning your initial judgements can help you uncover meaning and find truth in difficult situations. While students uncover meaning in a dance, play, or math problem, they "gain confidence as both intellectuals and creators. They also acquire the ability to persevere for long periods of time, giving them a sense of ownership of the learning process and helping them become lifelong learners" (Nathan, 2014). Nathan believes that more schools should have a deep level of student engagement centered around student's passions. Creativity can be utilized to enrich academic subjects and give students a strong sense of investment and pride in their education.
Reaction: Linda Nathan's personal accounts of how arts have positively influenced her students inspired me. Although Nathan did not provide as much statistical data as I would have hoped, I gained knowledge and understanding from reading her insightful anecdotes. I especially appreciated Nathan's stories about how performing the play West Side Story meant a lot to her inner city students who were well acquainted with gang violence. I think educators miss so many teachable moments by ignoring what goes on in students lives when they are outside of the classroom. Nathan had a good grasp on the fact that students' lives at home and relationships with their peers play a huge role in their ability to learn. By providing a space to discuss difficult social issues, Nathan made education authentic, and I think that Rhode Island schools should follow in her footsteps. There are so many teaching strategies, like bring creativity into school, that lead to personal growth and academic success, and Rhode Island has the opportunity to implement those strategies and change student's lives for the better.
IV. Arts Education: Does Arts Training Improve Social and Academic Skills?
Citation: Baker, B. (2012). Arts Education: Does Arts Training Improve Social and Academic Skills? CQ Press, 22(11), 253–276.
Summary: This journal seeks to answer the question, "does arts training improve social and academic skills?” (Baker, 2012). Along the way, it addresses the fact that due to “shrinking school budgets” and a “narrowing of the curriculum because of federal and state testing” arts education has been on the decline for more than two decades (Baker, 2012). The journal quotes Diane Ravitch, stating “the arts are absolutely crucial because these are the subjects and activities that bring children to school. They’re highly motivating, and they explained students’ ability to think and feel and get connected to other students” (Baker, 2012). The deputy executive director of the National Association for Music Education adds that arts classes require “discipline and set a high bar of excellence” noting that scoring an 85% on a math test is an achievement, whereas playing 85% of notes right is an area of growth (Baker 256). When it comes to motivation, researchers found that interest in the performing arts leads to “high levels of motivation and sustained attention that in turn improves cognition generally” answering the section title question, "does arts education improve academic performance?” (Baker, 2012). One of the most striking quotes from the journal comes from Lizz Lander, a teacher in Washington, who points out a problem with No Child Left Behind that goes against the very nature of the Act. Liza writes “every child that is musically inclined, every child who is visually incline, they are left behind” (Baker, 2012). The journal then shifts to an important integration question, ‘should the arts be integrated into science and math education’ with researchers and experts stating that there is an important need for the skills that artists learned in science classes especially the abilities to “observe acutely, how to abstract something to get the essence, how to make models of things” which help scientists express their ideas and solve problems (Baker, 2012). This connection supports the argument that arts can and should be integrated into science and math education as it provides the students with supplemental skills that will only strengthen them as learners. Towards the middle of the journal, a detailed chronology of the ever-changing arts education emphasis in the United States. Overall, the journal overviews the complicated history and likely complicated future of arts education in the United States. Baker argues that arts need to find their place in a heavily standards and accountability based education system in order to be taken seriously and valued as one would value science education. After providing a great amount of research and quotes to answer the question “does arts training improve social and academic skills” in the affirmative, Baker seems to suggest that there is still much to be done in terms of improving arts education and thus the overall education of American students.
Reaction: Baker's research provided substantial evidence, not just opinion, about the need for arts education. I especially liked Baker's suggestion to integrate arts education in core classes. Bringing creativity into the subjects currently being supported could be a way to get arts education to get more attention and funding. Making curriculum well-rounded could mean making subjects cross-curricular and creative instead of making math, reading, and science rigid while making art, music, and dance fluid and meaningful. Why not integrate fluid ways of thinking and hone in on student's diverse learning styles to make school a place where all subjects can be creatively explored.
V. Decreasing Public High School Elective Programs
Summary: This article discusses a common shift in this country that has an unfortunate result - public school students are losing enrichment opportunities. With the new Common Core State Standards’ focus on English and STEM classes, schools are moving their funds into these content areas in order to meet the demands of the standards. As a result, as the article writes, “programs in the arts, music, and other creative realms are dwindling” (Chen, 2016). Chen goes on to address that this shift presents two loses, 1) students are losing opportunities and 2) teachers are losing their jobs. Despite the fact that “95% of Americans think electives, specifically music, are essential and beneficial for a child’s development," school funding disparities and increased testing demands brought on by No Child Left Behind are adding to the number of electives lost in this country. Citing a list of data from SAT that shows that “students with coursework/experience in music performance and music appreciation scored higher on the SAT,” Chen provides a strong argument for the inclusion of electives, especially music, in the academic setting. Besides the academic benefits, Chen further argues that these courses are “proven to help students socially and behaviorally as well” citing evidence showing secondary students who participated in a music program reported the “lowest lifetime and current use of all substances” and made up a smaller percentage of students who are typically classified as “disruptive (based on factors such as frequent skipping of classes…arrests, and drop-outs)” (Chen, 2016). One way to “fight the funding crisis” as Chen writes, is through parental involvement in fundraising and and supporting local school district expenses. Clearly, these courses provide students with opportunities for growth academically, socially, and emotionally.
Reaction: Chen's article does an excellent job of giving evidence of the ways in which electives enhance student performance and wellness. Telling policy-makers that music and the arts will make students happier and more creative will only go so far, but saying those electives will make them score better in math and reading could be persuasive enough to spark a conversation about change. The change that I believe needs to happen is that more resources need to be allotted to the arts and other creative programing because, as Chen's article says, students grow emotionally, socially, and academically when they engage in music, art, etc. I think it is absurd that 95% of Americans think electives are essential and beneficial to a child's development, but such programs are still getting cut because there are some people in America whose opinions are heard because of the amount of money they have. If Rhode Island did not need the Race to the Top money, the voices of the majority might be able to be heard instead of smothered by officials who have traded the public's values for the money that is awarded to those who comply with the testing regulations. Although I do think Rhode Island's citizenry needs to have more of a say in what happens to students, I also think it is the state's responsibility to fund arts education and creative electives because it is not up to parents to fundraise. Access to a fulfilling educational experience should be available to all students in Rhode Island, not just to those whose parents were able to raise enough money to pay for enriching programs.
Overall Reaction to Research
In all five of the research items above, the need for a well-rounded curriculum was highlighted. Although math and reading are vital, there are many other subjects that enrich students' lives and make them ready to be respectful, intelligent, and healthy adults. Neglecting to recognize the importance of the arts in school can mean that more arts programs get cut and more students disengage with their education. Not only do creative electives teach students persistence, ingenuity, and interpersonal skills, but they also give students a reason to pursue their goals and dedicate themselves to their education in a meaningful way. The American education system has a lot of promise, but it is being undermined by policy-makers who are prioritizing standardized testing. If poverty, racism, and inequitable funding are addressed, having a balanced curriculum with creativity blended with academic rigor can improve the lives of students to a large extent.
How this Research Helps us Identify or Refine a Strategy to Improve Schools in Rhode Island
If Rhode Island schools are to be the best the can be, performing well in math and reading can not be the only goal of policy-makers, community members, educators, and students. Social studies, humanities, arts, and sciences need to be included in all children's educations, not just the ones who can afford to go to a school that offers a rich curriculum. Students who perform poorly in math and reading on standardized tests should still be able to participate in the elective programs that keep them engaged in school while they do their best to overcome cultural and economic odds to improve in math and reading. Rhode Island policy-makers needs to acknowledge that standardized tests like Common Core and PARCC are in fact leading to narrow curricula and the need to teach to the test, two processes that de-professionalize teaching and make learning less authentic and meaningful. Rhode Island schools can be improved if they provide and prioritize rich curricula for all students while addressing systemic issues that cause differences in achievement levels between children.
Author: Tory Kern
Introduction
In each of the five reputable sources, the importance of a well-rounded curriculum with enriching electives will be discussed. Diane Ravitch's chapter on the essentials of a good education will be examined first. Ravitch will focus on the purpose of education and what children need to become enlightened citizens. Second, Sam Dillon of the New York Times will provide examples of what narrow curricula look like and discuss why math and reading have been the priority of so many schools across the United States. Next, Linda Nathan, from Kappa Delta Pi's academic journal, The Educational Forum, will provide a heartfelt argument for integrating arts into academic curricula. Following this, the ways that arts training improve social and academic skills will be explored. Last, the negative impact of cutting elective programs will be considered in the hopes of showing leaders and American citizens that students need a well-rounded curriculum in order to thrive.
I. Chapter 24: The Essentials of a Good Education in Reign of Error: The Hoax of the Privatization Movement and the Danger to America's Public Schools
Citation: Ravitch, D. (2013). Reign of Error: The Hoax of the Privatization Movement and the Danger to America’s Public Schools. Vintage.
Summary: Acclaimed education historian and policy analyst Diane Ravitch has many ideas about how to improve public education. Ravitch's third solution states, "Every school should have a full, balanced and rich curriculum, including the arts, science, history, literature, civics, geography, foreign languages, mathematics, and physical education" (Ravitch, 2013). Having a full range of electives and academic opportunities is a reality for schools in affluent communities, but children who grow up in low-income areas do not have a similar experience with curriculum. No Child Left Behind and Race to the Top have linked federal funding and teacher evaluation to high test scores in math and reading, thus undermining the value of enriching academic areas other than those that are tested. Ravitch asserts that the sole purpose of education is "to prepare everyone to assume the rights and responsibilities of citizenship in a democracy," and that narrow curricula are not going to provide enough inspiration and information to students who are learning where their place in society will be. Rather than putting all of a school's resources and energy into a few subjects, Ravitch suggests that studying civics, government, economics, statistics, foreign language, creative writing, and the arts to help prepare students for life ahead. It is a diverse curriculum and ample opportunities for personal growth that will provide the time and place for the "mental, physical, and ethical development" (Ravitch, 2013) that students need. Ravitch is disgusted by the way that children are beginning to be valued solely for their test scores instead of the worth of their character, and she suggests schools shift their curricular priorities to be more expansive and accessible to all students.
Reaction: Reading Ravitch's claims helped me solidify my beliefs about the need for a well-rounded curriculum in American public schools. I was so fortunate to be offered pottery, film, French, economics, world religions, history, environmental sciences, creative writing, and advanced calculus all in one school. The problem is, I paid for that service and I agree with Ravitch that all children have a right to what I paid for. I believe that the inequities that are rooted in deeply rooted racism and classism manifest themselves in and are exacerbated by the differences in curricular opportunities amongst schools. I wish Ravitch explained more about how offering a wider range of courses to low-performing students it would affect their academic performance and personal growth. I feel conflicted because I do want all students to do well in math and reading, but I also know that only studying a few subjects that I am not good at every day would demolish my love of learning. Overall, Ravitch's points about the essentials of a good education made me more excited to research well-rounded curricula and gave me more confidence in my ideas about the topic. If more legislators knew about all of the positive affects of electives and enriching curricula, they might realized that pressuring schools to perform well in a few subjects leads to a well-rounded curriculum being compromised.
II. Schools Cut Back Subjects to Push Reading and Math
Citation: Dillon, S. (2006, March 26). Schools Cut Back Subjects to Push Reading and Math. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/26/education/26child.html
Summary: In this New York Times newspaper article, Sam Dillon writes about the current trend towards "increasing — in some cases tripling — the class time that low-proficiency students spend on reading and math" in America (Dillon, 2006). Dillon notes that this just a trend in some schools; rather, "71 percent of the nation's 15,000 school districts had reduced the hours of instructional time spent on history, music and other subjects to open up more time for reading and math" (Dillon, 2006). While some argue that students need to know the basics in math and reading before they can move onto anything else, others demand that American leaders take a stand and rework the educational system so that all students are able to participate in full curricular experience. Dillon discusses the affect narrow curricula have on the labor market by citing the heightened demand for mathematics educators and the lack of work for teachers who teach electives classes. Although remedial classes that take away time for electives have helped some students improve in math and reading, test scores have not been increasing "fast enough to allow [schools] to keep up with the rising test benchmarks" (Dillon, 2006). So, students who need the most help discovering the value of education continue to sit through hours upon hours of math and reading instruction that often bore them and tire them out. Overall, there has been a large shift towards prioritizing teaching time to math and reading instruction, and the neglectful treatment of other subjects has drastically changed the educational culture of American schools.
Reaction: This New York Times newspaper article made me feel enraged. To hear that policy makers and administrators have put teachers in the position where teachers have to tell their underprivileged students that they can only enjoy school again if they perform better on standardized tests is appalling. Instead of addressing root causes of inequity like poverty, discrimination, and inequitable funding, policy-makers actually have the audacity to strip the worst-off students of their passions and put them in remedial classes for all periods of the day but one. Students are absolutely going to continue to lose their desire to learn if creative electives and diverse curricula continue to be compromised by profit-driven politicians and businesspeople. Students in schools with narrow curricula are not even getting the chance to know if they like other subjects than math, reading, and gym because their options have been limited so much. Who will know what he/she is passionate about if he/she does not get a chance to look around and find out what intrigues him/her? Students who desperately want to take the courses they love are being told to concentrate in math and reading so much that they eventually can participate in what they love again, but such a suggestion is deeply flawed. Island schools need to think about what is best for the whole child, not just for test results (on tests that are culturally biased) because students need creative and diverse courses that engage and inspire them or they will just barely scrape by for the rest of their lives.
III. Why Arts?
Citation: Nathan, L. (2014). Why Arts? The Educational Forum, 78(4), 351–354.
Summary: In the article "Why Arts?," Linda Nathan eloquently describes how placing arts at the center of education can improve student's lives. Nathan writes that having creativity as part of the curriculum can give a school a sense of purpose and can help students feel like they play an important role in the world around them. Improving in history, English, or reading is so much more enjoyable for students when they are actively engaged. Performing plays, learning dances, and singing songs can teach students how to use their passion to stay determined and triumph despite hardships. Furthermore, acknowledging and celebrating students' diverse backgrounds in the classroom can be extremely empowering and add meaning to academic subjects that may have seemed mundane before they became personally relevant. Young people go through so much in their lives, and having a way to express their frustration, joy, confusion, or sadness is incredibly therapeutic and empowering. One lesson from art that transfers to academia is that you are going to encounter many problems and that questioning your initial judgements can help you uncover meaning and find truth in difficult situations. While students uncover meaning in a dance, play, or math problem, they "gain confidence as both intellectuals and creators. They also acquire the ability to persevere for long periods of time, giving them a sense of ownership of the learning process and helping them become lifelong learners" (Nathan, 2014). Nathan believes that more schools should have a deep level of student engagement centered around student's passions. Creativity can be utilized to enrich academic subjects and give students a strong sense of investment and pride in their education.
Reaction: Linda Nathan's personal accounts of how arts have positively influenced her students inspired me. Although Nathan did not provide as much statistical data as I would have hoped, I gained knowledge and understanding from reading her insightful anecdotes. I especially appreciated Nathan's stories about how performing the play West Side Story meant a lot to her inner city students who were well acquainted with gang violence. I think educators miss so many teachable moments by ignoring what goes on in students lives when they are outside of the classroom. Nathan had a good grasp on the fact that students' lives at home and relationships with their peers play a huge role in their ability to learn. By providing a space to discuss difficult social issues, Nathan made education authentic, and I think that Rhode Island schools should follow in her footsteps. There are so many teaching strategies, like bring creativity into school, that lead to personal growth and academic success, and Rhode Island has the opportunity to implement those strategies and change student's lives for the better.
IV. Arts Education: Does Arts Training Improve Social and Academic Skills?
Citation: Baker, B. (2012). Arts Education: Does Arts Training Improve Social and Academic Skills? CQ Press, 22(11), 253–276.
Summary: This journal seeks to answer the question, "does arts training improve social and academic skills?” (Baker, 2012). Along the way, it addresses the fact that due to “shrinking school budgets” and a “narrowing of the curriculum because of federal and state testing” arts education has been on the decline for more than two decades (Baker, 2012). The journal quotes Diane Ravitch, stating “the arts are absolutely crucial because these are the subjects and activities that bring children to school. They’re highly motivating, and they explained students’ ability to think and feel and get connected to other students” (Baker, 2012). The deputy executive director of the National Association for Music Education adds that arts classes require “discipline and set a high bar of excellence” noting that scoring an 85% on a math test is an achievement, whereas playing 85% of notes right is an area of growth (Baker 256). When it comes to motivation, researchers found that interest in the performing arts leads to “high levels of motivation and sustained attention that in turn improves cognition generally” answering the section title question, "does arts education improve academic performance?” (Baker, 2012). One of the most striking quotes from the journal comes from Lizz Lander, a teacher in Washington, who points out a problem with No Child Left Behind that goes against the very nature of the Act. Liza writes “every child that is musically inclined, every child who is visually incline, they are left behind” (Baker, 2012). The journal then shifts to an important integration question, ‘should the arts be integrated into science and math education’ with researchers and experts stating that there is an important need for the skills that artists learned in science classes especially the abilities to “observe acutely, how to abstract something to get the essence, how to make models of things” which help scientists express their ideas and solve problems (Baker, 2012). This connection supports the argument that arts can and should be integrated into science and math education as it provides the students with supplemental skills that will only strengthen them as learners. Towards the middle of the journal, a detailed chronology of the ever-changing arts education emphasis in the United States. Overall, the journal overviews the complicated history and likely complicated future of arts education in the United States. Baker argues that arts need to find their place in a heavily standards and accountability based education system in order to be taken seriously and valued as one would value science education. After providing a great amount of research and quotes to answer the question “does arts training improve social and academic skills” in the affirmative, Baker seems to suggest that there is still much to be done in terms of improving arts education and thus the overall education of American students.
Reaction: Baker's research provided substantial evidence, not just opinion, about the need for arts education. I especially liked Baker's suggestion to integrate arts education in core classes. Bringing creativity into the subjects currently being supported could be a way to get arts education to get more attention and funding. Making curriculum well-rounded could mean making subjects cross-curricular and creative instead of making math, reading, and science rigid while making art, music, and dance fluid and meaningful. Why not integrate fluid ways of thinking and hone in on student's diverse learning styles to make school a place where all subjects can be creatively explored.
V. Decreasing Public High School Elective Programs
Citation: Chen, G. (2006). Decreasing Public High School Elective Programs. Retrieved November 20, 2014, from http://www.publicschoolreview.com/articles/51
Summary: This article discusses a common shift in this country that has an unfortunate result - public school students are losing enrichment opportunities. With the new Common Core State Standards’ focus on English and STEM classes, schools are moving their funds into these content areas in order to meet the demands of the standards. As a result, as the article writes, “programs in the arts, music, and other creative realms are dwindling” (Chen, 2016). Chen goes on to address that this shift presents two loses, 1) students are losing opportunities and 2) teachers are losing their jobs. Despite the fact that “95% of Americans think electives, specifically music, are essential and beneficial for a child’s development," school funding disparities and increased testing demands brought on by No Child Left Behind are adding to the number of electives lost in this country. Citing a list of data from SAT that shows that “students with coursework/experience in music performance and music appreciation scored higher on the SAT,” Chen provides a strong argument for the inclusion of electives, especially music, in the academic setting. Besides the academic benefits, Chen further argues that these courses are “proven to help students socially and behaviorally as well” citing evidence showing secondary students who participated in a music program reported the “lowest lifetime and current use of all substances” and made up a smaller percentage of students who are typically classified as “disruptive (based on factors such as frequent skipping of classes…arrests, and drop-outs)” (Chen, 2016). One way to “fight the funding crisis” as Chen writes, is through parental involvement in fundraising and and supporting local school district expenses. Clearly, these courses provide students with opportunities for growth academically, socially, and emotionally.
Reaction: Chen's article does an excellent job of giving evidence of the ways in which electives enhance student performance and wellness. Telling policy-makers that music and the arts will make students happier and more creative will only go so far, but saying those electives will make them score better in math and reading could be persuasive enough to spark a conversation about change. The change that I believe needs to happen is that more resources need to be allotted to the arts and other creative programing because, as Chen's article says, students grow emotionally, socially, and academically when they engage in music, art, etc. I think it is absurd that 95% of Americans think electives are essential and beneficial to a child's development, but such programs are still getting cut because there are some people in America whose opinions are heard because of the amount of money they have. If Rhode Island did not need the Race to the Top money, the voices of the majority might be able to be heard instead of smothered by officials who have traded the public's values for the money that is awarded to those who comply with the testing regulations. Although I do think Rhode Island's citizenry needs to have more of a say in what happens to students, I also think it is the state's responsibility to fund arts education and creative electives because it is not up to parents to fundraise. Access to a fulfilling educational experience should be available to all students in Rhode Island, not just to those whose parents were able to raise enough money to pay for enriching programs.
Overall Reaction to Research
In all five of the research items above, the need for a well-rounded curriculum was highlighted. Although math and reading are vital, there are many other subjects that enrich students' lives and make them ready to be respectful, intelligent, and healthy adults. Neglecting to recognize the importance of the arts in school can mean that more arts programs get cut and more students disengage with their education. Not only do creative electives teach students persistence, ingenuity, and interpersonal skills, but they also give students a reason to pursue their goals and dedicate themselves to their education in a meaningful way. The American education system has a lot of promise, but it is being undermined by policy-makers who are prioritizing standardized testing. If poverty, racism, and inequitable funding are addressed, having a balanced curriculum with creativity blended with academic rigor can improve the lives of students to a large extent.
How this Research Helps us Identify or Refine a Strategy to Improve Schools in Rhode Island
If Rhode Island schools are to be the best the can be, performing well in math and reading can not be the only goal of policy-makers, community members, educators, and students. Social studies, humanities, arts, and sciences need to be included in all children's educations, not just the ones who can afford to go to a school that offers a rich curriculum. Students who perform poorly in math and reading on standardized tests should still be able to participate in the elective programs that keep them engaged in school while they do their best to overcome cultural and economic odds to improve in math and reading. Rhode Island policy-makers needs to acknowledge that standardized tests like Common Core and PARCC are in fact leading to narrow curricula and the need to teach to the test, two processes that de-professionalize teaching and make learning less authentic and meaningful. Rhode Island schools can be improved if they provide and prioritize rich curricula for all students while addressing systemic issues that cause differences in achievement levels between children.